Actually, if you go to 'the-digital-picture' and look in the ISO 12233 comparisons, the 24-105 is better at some focal lengths at the same apertures. However, overall, the 24-70 appears to be consistently better in the mid frame and at the edges. Neither one looks significantly better than the other overall though.

Uhuuu - Tamron has announced a new 24-70mm as well:
http://www.tamron.eu/en/news/read/data/ ... 4-70m.html- first Tamron lens with weather sealing
- USD (= USM)
aaand: VC (=IS)
And the lens isn't really heavier. Now why can Tamron do it but Canon can't?
Let's see what IQ it can produce. Maybe that won't be just the cheap alternative but the better solution if you don't care whether your lens has a red ring or not? With their 70-200mm they have proven that they know how to produce nice optics.

_________________http://www.AnderssonPhoto.com Equipment: A blend of Canon, Nikon, Yashica, Leica, Voigtlander, Samyang and Sigma. All of which you can see on my website!Wishlist: Leica M 240, Summilux 50 ASPH, Summilux 24 ASPH

If I had the first version, I wouldn't upgrade either. Maybe the new lens is a little bit better but not enough to justify the paid money.

If they upgraded the 100-400mm with better IQ, better IS and especially weather sealing I might think of upgrading (but I don't think it would get further than "thinking" in the next few years after the release). At the moment I just want a walkaround lens and for me I chose the 24-105mm F4. As soon as I have the money. Maybe I'll save more money and get a 5D3+24-105mm kit in the future

It wasn't that long ago that you just got your 24-105mm f/4L IS USM lens.
I would generally think it would be a while before you would want to replace it with anything.

There is always the 16-35mm f/2.8L USM II or the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II if you wanted a f/2.8 aperture with some overlap with your 24-105mm f/4L.
Not to mention the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

And speaking on these lenses, ever since the official announcement I have been underwhelmed. None of these lenses is very interesting for me or making me want to part with my hard earned money. They are probably significant improvements over what had come before, and people have especially been wanting Canon to focus on the consumer grade primes. Canon has listened and even put IS into their wide consumer primes. But the problem with all this is that Canon is just responding to what people want rather than providing them something they did not realize they wanted or needed.

To quote a well known character, "After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."

well the 24-70 is 1 of the sharpest lens I shot,it almost as sharp as my 100mm 2.8L, sharper then my 17-40mm. But it had back focus problems that had to be sent into canon. The color the 24-70 lens produces is spectacular(better then any of my zoom lens or my 100mm), what's really the biggest selling point to me on the new 24-70 II is the inter focus with usm (correct me if I'm wrong) + it's 145g lighter. just hard to swallow $1300 vs $2299.

Quote:

How many of u will agree jiko's words!!

As for as the 24-105mm f4L I don't own it,(so cant comment on the sharpness) reason why I don't own it the mm range is to far apart for me.

@ BleuDragon I now I have only just got my 24-105 but I told myself if they ever brought a 24-70 IS I would buy it. The 2.8 aperture with IS would be very nice and I wouldn't mind loosing 35mm for it.

I know I can get other lenses and plan to get a 70-200 2.8 IS II as soon as I have the money, which may be a while since I just bought a 17 inch MacBook Pro

I agree with you Canons latest lenses are a little disappointing. I don't think they have done enough to keep up with the competition. This is especially true with the cameras. Nikons D800 looks very good, hopefully Canon won't be too far behind with a 5D mk3

I think I will set aside the idea of a Canon 24-70mm L zoom for a while, either the current one or the II, and turn my attention back to a 135L. By late Summer of 2013, I will have several financial obligations out of my way, and by then, there should be some user reviews of the 24-70mm 2.8L II posted.